Declare War on Police Brutality

Brooklyn Police Officer Fired a Year Before Retirement for Stealing $20

A cop from a notorious Brooklyn precinct is complaining that he was treated unfairly — losing his job a year before retirement for stealing just $20.

Officer Richard Arroyo, who worked out of the 75th Precinct in East New York, is suing for reinstatement, arguing that if he could be booted for such “minor misconduct” then “no New York City police officer’s job is safe.”

That logic makes some kind of twisted sense in the 75th — which was made infamous by cops like Michael Dowd, who in the 1980s and 1990s shook down drug dealers for big bucks.

“I just feel like other people, other people are doing a lot worse than I am and still have their jobs,” Arroyo told The Post outside his Long Island home.

The veteran officer’s downfall came when he was targeted in a random “integrity test,” on April 20, 2016, that he failed miserably, according to records.

He pulled over a drunken driver, who turned out to be an undercover cop, according to court papers. He then rifled through the undercover’s SUV and took the 20 from a roll of bills in a cup holder that totaled $55, according to the NYPD report on the sting.

Arroyo, who joined the force in 1998, claimed he only counted the dough.

The 47-year-old Islip resident later admitted he took the money but said he “was human” and regretted the mistake, according to the report.

His Manhattan Supreme Court suit touts a “long and unblemished NYPD history, filled with dozens of medals,” including — ironically — one for reporting attempted bribes. Yet the department found that in his first four years on the job, he faced three allegations for excessive force, abuse of authority or offensive language toward civilians.

The married dad says in court papers that his punishment — his ouster plus losing his retirement benefits — “is shocking to the conscience.”

About author

Filming Cops was started in 2010 as a conglomerative blogging service documenting police abuse. The aim isn’t to demonize the natural concept of security provision as such, but to highlight specific cases of State-monopolized police brutality that are otherwise ignored by traditional media outlets.